ATELIER: Example of Action Research. Giulio Jacucci

Transcription

1 ATELIER: Example of Action Research Giulio Jacucci

2 Content Introduction! The Atelier Project! The Process! Methodological Background Observations! The diversity of design representations! The distributed character of learning! Uses of space as a resource Qualities of the environment! materiality! creative density! configurability! re-programming! connecting multiple travels Open prototypes and co-development! Mixed media configurations! projection set-ups Component development! mobile support for visits! ediary Field trials of component assemblies! The texture brush Conclusions! Method tool box! Principles

3 The Atelier Project Atelier Sites! Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna! Interaction Design Malmö Setting! Project based learning of students Iterative design! Ethnographic field work! Field trials! Cooperative prototyping atelier.k3.mah.se

4 Partners Malmö Högskola Creative Environments, K3 Malmö, Sweden Technische Universität Wien Institut für Gestaltungs- und Wirkungsforschung, Austria Akademie der Bildenden Künste Institut für Kunst und Architektur Wien Austria Imagination Computer Services GesmbH TechGate Vienna Consorzio Milano Ricerche, Dipartimento Di Informatica Sistemistica e Communicazione, Italy University of Oulu Department of Information Processing Science, Finland Interactive Institute Sweden

5 Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Pro-searching practice Observations Field Trials Field Trials Concept Design Qualities Concept design Components Components Assemblies Infrastructure

6 Methodological Background 1/3 Setting oriented design of computer artefacts:! the design of computer artefacts as a concerned social, historical, creative, and planned activity in which we try to anticipate computer artefacts and their use (Ehn 1988, p. 171).! What we design is not just artefacts, but by interventions a changed or reformed practice. (p. 234) Practice oriented design vs. Usability lab! Our agenda, in contrast, is to bring developing objects out into the environments of their intended use, such that their appropriability into those environments becomes a central criterion of adequacy for their design. Suchman 2002

7 Methodological Background 2/3 Users construct technologies! Users 'construct' technology; they do this both symbolically, in their 'reading' of artefacts, and literally, in the articulation work that is essential before a concrete configuration of artefacts (as distinct from the generic system-products that emerge from usability labs in Silicon Valley) can serve as an adequate day-by-day supporting structure for a live practice. (Hales 1994) Changing nature of technology towards embodied interaction! the designer does not have absolute control, only influence. In turn this suggests if the meaning of the use of the technology is, first, in flux, and second, something that is worked out again and again in each setting, then the technology needs to be able to support this sort of repurposing, and needs to be able to support the communication of meaning through it Dourish 2001

8 Methodological Background 3/3 Work-oriented design, this includes! combining: in situ interviewing, workplace observations and video analysis with design interventions (Trigg, Blomberg, Suchman 1996 p. 332) Design Cycles! design as being part of a larger and inevitable cycle of observing use, developing requirements (formal or informal), designing, building and again observing Bannon 1996.! Evaluation and use an integral part of the design and not terminal stages.! Introducing a prototype in an on ongoing activity it is not a set of metrics about the system that have been evaluated but possible roles of novel technology in participants activities! a careful systematic account of what happens in particular settings when a proto-type or system is installed, and how the system is viewed by the people on the ground, can provide useful information for evaluating the system and its fitness for the pur-pose it was designed. Bannon 1996

9 Content Introduction! Methodological Background! The Process Observations! The diversity of design representations! The distributed character of learning! Uses of space as a resource Qualities of the environment! materiality! creative density! configurability! re-programming! connecting multiple travels Open prototypes and co-development! Mixed media configurations! projection set-ups Component development! mobile support for visits! ediary Field trials of component assemblies! The texture brush

10 Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Pro-searching practice Observations Field Trials Field Trials Concept Design Qualities Concept design Components Components Assemblies Infrastructure

11 Observations Ethnographic observations! Participant observation Interaction analysis! From video recording Interviews! Un structured On site Stakeholders participation! Architects, teachers, students Creative methods! (Games)! (Cultural probes)

12

13 Diversity of design representations

14

15 The distributed character of learning distributed in time and place visits to remote places, where material is collected, brought back, and revisited

16 Uses of space as a resource

17 Content Introduction! Methodological Background! The Process Observations! The diversity of design representations! The distributed character of learning! Uses of space as a resource Qualities of the environment! materiality! creative density! configurability! re-programming! connecting multiple travels Open prototypes and co-development! Mixed media configurations! projection set-ups Component development! mobile support for visits! ediary Field trials of component assemblies! The texture brush Conclusions! Method tool box! Principles

18 Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Pro-searching practice Observations Field Trials Field Trials Concept Design Qualities Concept design Components Components Assemblies Infrastructure

19 Materiality The diversity of materials physical features carrying meaning abstractness, e.g. fragility, denseness, atmosphere

20 Creative density maintain the design material physically present so that it can merge with the ongoing design work encounter surprising or interesting combinations of objects assume unusual perspectives onto an object

21 Connecting multiple travels Maintain/forge connections between design and and the outside world Multiple travels Sharing perspectives of design-relevant materials

22 Re-programming learning to see (familiar) things differently e.g. to work with contradictions the mosque, outside lively, inside an oasis of tranquillity ; to let market and street reach into the park; to use empty shops for parking; to connect living with the car, its sound machine being used in the living space

23 Configurability Setting up project space appropriating, configuring, personalizing space Periodical ad hoc configurations re-configurations of space and artefacts (including computers and furniture) to stage weekly presentations, daily re-configurations of artefacts supporting different work arrangements solitary work, group discussions, performing and presenting, building models

24 Configurability

25 Configurability

26 Configurability adaptability to a diversity of uses and identities Setting up own project space, appropriating it, configuring, personalizing it supporting a variety of cooperative arrangements solitary work, group discussions, performing and presenting, building models

27 Content Introduction! Methodological Background! The Process Observations! The diversity of design representations! The distributed character of learning! Uses of space as a resource Qualities of the environment! materiality! creative density! configurability! re-programming! connecting multiple travels Open prototypes and co-development! Mixed media configurations! projection set-ups Component development! mobile support for visits! ediary Field trials of component assemblies! The texture brush Conclusions! Method tool box! Principles

28 Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Pro-searching practice Observations Field Trials Field Trials Concept Design Qualities Concept design Components Components Assemblies Infrastructure

29 Trials Trial runs! Trials with prospective users! Trails with Experts Interventions in the field! Explorative trials! Formative trials! Summative trials! trials

30 Open Prototypes Co-Development Field Trials set up! four groups of students working for two months with our technologies as part of their design projects! facilitating their integration by making some extensions to the prototypes Objective of observing use! trying to understand the ways students interwove the technologies with their physical environment

31 Digital Infrastructure ediary (ipaq) Tag Reader Sensors etc. Texture Painter Multimedia Player Bar code reader... Adapter Adapter Adapter Adapter Adapter Tag readers, Tiny servers, etc. Components, component assemblies and applications Adapter Communication by XML messages Hypermedia database External services Adapter Kernel Adapters hide the details of the communication Adapter Multimedia content selector Kernel dispatches messages in the system & provides facilities for finding components & services Registry of attached components & services Name service Logging service Internal services

32 Projection set-ups Setting up spaces

33 The train ride

34

35

36

37

38 A miniature soccer field as an interface to guide the presentation

39 texture painter interactive way of experimenting with scale, colour, background, and social use of physical objects

40 Physical Infrastructure

41 Content Introduction! Methodological Background! The Process Observations! The diversity of design representations! The distributed character of learning! Uses of space as a resource Qualities of the environment! materiality! creative density! configurability! re-programming! connecting multiple travels Open prototypes and co-development! Mixed media configurations! projection set-ups Component development! mobile support for visits! ediary Field trials of component assemblies! The texture brush Conclusions! Method tool box! Principles

42 Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Pro-searching practice Observations Field Trials Field Trials Concept Design Qualities Concept design Components Components Assemblies Infrastructure

43 Recording and Re-experiencing Visits

44 Activity: Visiting Collecting artefacts e.g. Maps Making Annotations Sound Notes

45 Activity: Re-experiencing and Sharing Immersiveness Materiality of Artefacts Multiplicity and tangibility

46 Recording & Storing

47 System: Configuring & Navigating

48 Navigating

49 Content Introduction! Methodological Background! The Process Observations! The diversity of design representations! The distributed character of learning! Uses of space as a resource Qualities of the environment! materiality! creative density! configurability! re-programming! connecting multiple travels Open prototypes and co-development! Mixed media configurations! projection set-ups Component development! mobile support for visits! ediary Field trials of component assemblies! The texture brush Conclusions! Method tool box! Principles

50 Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Pro-searching practice Observations Field Trials Field Trials Concept Design Qualities Concept design Components Components Assemblies Infrastructure

51 The Texture Brush

52 Organisation of Trial Method Situated evaluation, work-oriented design evaluation introducing a prototype in an on ongoing activity to explore its role and fitness Setting 8 groups of architecture students (16 students) in a course assignments over a period of two weeks the teams took turns to produce a final presentation Each team three or four sessions of several hours in the environment and presented their work in a final plenary session Assignment an analysis of one of the 'icons' of modernist architecture from a selection of Villas in the city. They built two models 1:50 and 1:20 in scale (of an interesting spatial detail) and used the environment for analyzing scale and materiality. exploring how materiality and context change the meaning of the building.

53

54 An Environment for AR Painting and Collage The hypermedia database upload to the database, pictures and videos, to work with models. print-outs are created with thumbnails and barcodes The Texture Brush paint digital textures on models using a physical brush. a data projector, an infrared tracking system, and a physical brush augmented with a wireless button and a retro-reflecting surface Large projection screens Three projectors are used to play media on large projector screens behind the models The barcode configuration poster A barcode Reader is used to perform basic configuration commands in the environment.

55 The Texture Brush Menu Bar Any image or video can be used as a texture to paint the objects and a menu bar displays the textures as a palette along with four main menu elements as a status bar Brush-type/size, To specify brush type, brush size and shape of the brush. Flat brushes, round brushes or square brushes will be available. There is a function to create a polygon and fill it with a particular texture. Once an area/polygon is specified it will be filled at once. Transform menu, element scale to enlarge or down-size the texture by moving the physical brush at various distances from the model. Rotate can turn the texture clockwise or counter clockwise by rotating the physical brush

56

57

58 Working with Immersive Media Groups worked to produce different configurations of textures and background for a model, the following unanticipated uses were observed: 1. installing a second Texture Brush to project textures from two directions, e.g. from the top and change the appearance of the floors or the roof while at the same time 'painting' the façade 2. using a portable mouse a wireless mouse mounted on top of a cardboard box as there was only one brush this was used especially for operating a second Texture Brush 3. taking pictures with a high resolution digital camera all around the model and also capturing the background, 4. making and recording walkthroughs in the model using a web camera, 5. using pictures or videos of the models on a large screen, playing with dimensions of small details of the models. Users appreciated immersiveness the possibility of using multiple large screens in the backgroundand the possibility to rapidly create collages of textures and backgrounds for a model like the possibility to flexibly change it by loading and saving configurations.

59

60

61 Synchronous collaboration on and around the model 1. One participant operating the barcode configuration and media posters and another participant painting with the physical brush. discuss which textures to put on the palette or the back-grounds (tight collaboration) 2. One participant painting the model from one direction (front) another participant painting the model from another direction (above) engage in brief and sporadic discussions on parts of the models where their work meets up or on the general concept of the model 3. While the one participant changes painted textures and backgrounds the other documents the changes, creating different pictures from the same view

62 Content Introduction! The Atelier Project! The Process! Methodological Background Observations! The diversity of design representations! The distributed character of learning! Uses of space as a resource Qualities of the environment! materiality! creative density! configurability! re-programming! connecting multiple travels Open prototypes and co-development! Mixed media configurations! projection set-ups Component development! mobile support for visits! ediary Field trials of component assemblies! The texture brush Conclusions! Method tool box! Principles

63 Method tool box! Understanding! Careful ethnographic studies! Interaction analysis! Interviews! Inspiration Mixing Ethnography and design! Cultural probes! Technology probes! Games! Co-evolution and co-development! Participatory design! Open prototypes and configurability! Intervention and grounding! Explorative trials! Summative trials! Tests

64 Principles! Naturalistic ecological approach to the user! The field it s an organisational settings where to encounter practice! Participants have their own project and goals! Dialogical process! It contributes with debate, multiple, partial, and located knowledges! Iterative design! Breaking the waterfall model! Less importance to specification/requirements! More importance to use (scenarios-episodes)! Multidisciplinarity

65 ! Trigg RH, Blomberg J & Suchman L (1999). Moving document collections online: The evolution of a shared repository. Proceedings of the Sixth European Conference on Com-puter Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW'99). S. Bødker, M. Kyng, K. Schmidt (eds.). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer, ! Bannon, L. J.: Use, Design and Evaluation - Steps towards an Integration. In: Shapiro, D., Tauber, M., Traunmueller, R. (eds): The Design of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Group-ware Systems. Amsterdam: North Holland, (1996)

66

67